Just two days after the United States government criminally charged Edward Snowden with espionage and other crimes, the infamous whistleblower is on the move. On Sunday, the former NSA contractor left Hong Kong on a commercial flight, landed in Moscow, and was reportedly picked up by Venezuelan diplomats in the Russian capital.

Snowden’s travel is being assisted by WikiLeaks, and he is still in transit to a “democratic nation”—possibly Venezuela or Ecuador. ABC News reports that Snowden's US passport was revoked on Saturday. A senior American government official told the news network, "We have little idea how he left Hong Kong." That could suggest Snowden has secured travel documents, such as a temporary passport or a laissez-passer, from another country.

UPDATE 11:43am CT: Ricardo Patino, the foreign minister of Ecuador, wrote on Twitter: "The Government of Ecuador has received an asylum request from Edward J. Snowden."

Ars has contacted the State Department in Washington, D.C., and the Ecuadorian Embassy in Moscow for confirmation, but neither immediately responded.

UPDATE 9:30pm CT: According to an e-mail sent to Ars from US State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki: "As is routine and consistent with US regulations, persons with felony arrest warrants are subject to having their passport revoked. Such a revocation does not affect citizenship status. Persons wanted on felony charges, such as Mr. Snowden, should not be allowed to proceed in any further international travel, other than is necessary to return him to the United States. Because of the Privacy Act, we cannot comment on Mr. Snowden's passport specifically."

Meanwhile, Washington says it still wants Snowden extradited to the US.

"We will continue to discuss this matter with Hong Kong and pursue relevant law enforcement cooperation with other countries where Mr. Snowden may be attempting to travel," said Nanda Chitre, a spokesperson for the United States Department of Justice, in a statement.

Russia’s Interfax news agency reports that Snowden is spending the night in Moscow before heading for Havana, Cuba. He will then continue on to Caracas, Venezuela (Google Translate). WikiLeaks issued a statement saying that it was helping move Snowden around the globe.

Mr. Edward Snowden, the American whistleblower who exposed evidence of a global surveillance regime conducted by US and UK intelligence agencies, has left Hong Kong legally. He is bound for a democratic nation via a safe route for the purposes of asylum and is being escorted by diplomats and legal advisors from WikiLeaks.

Mr. Snowden requested that WikiLeaks use its legal expertise and experience to secure his safety. Once Mr. Snowden arrives at his final destination, his request will be formally processed.

Former Spanish Judge Mr. Baltasar Garzon, legal director of WikiLeaks and lawyer for Julian Assange, has made the following statement:

"The WikiLeaks legal team and I are interested in preserving Mr. Snowden’s rights and protecting him as a person. What is being done to Mr. Snowden and to Mr. Julian Assange—for making or facilitating disclosures in the public interest—is an assault against the people."

The group also identified Sarah Harrison, a Briton legal researcher and journalist who is apparently travelling with Snowden and the WikiLeaks team.

"There is no legal basis to restrict Mr. Snowden from leaving Hong Kong"

Back in Hong Kong, the South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported that lawyers from the quasi-city-state worked with Snowden during his stay there.

“Snowden left Hong Kong today through legal, legitimate means and the proper immigration channels,” attorney Robert Tibbo told the SCMP. "We have been acting for Snowden for the past two weeks.”

Mr. Edward Snowden left Hong Kong today (June 23) on his own accord for a third country through a lawful and normal channel.

The US Government earlier on made a request to the [Hong Kong Special Administrative Region] Government for the issue of a provisional warrant of arrest against Mr. Snowden. Since the documents provided by the US Government did not fully comply with the legal requirements under Hong Kong law, the HKSAR Government has requested the US Government to provide additional information so that the Department of Justice could consider whether the US Government's request can meet the relevant legal conditions. As the HKSAR Government has yet to have sufficient information to process the request for provisional warrant of arrest, there is no legal basis to restrict Mr. Snowden from leaving Hong Kong.

The HKSAR Government has already informed the US Government of Mr. Snowden's departure.

Meanwhile, the HKSAR Government has formally written to the US Government requesting clarification on earlier reports about the hacking of computer systems in Hong Kong by US government agencies. The HKSAR Government will continue to follow up on the matter so as to protect the legal rights of the people of Hong Kong.

UPDATE 20:02pm CT: US State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki issued a statement on the Snowden situation to Ars:

"As is routine and consistent with US regulations, persons with felony arrest warrants are subject to having their passport revoked. Such a revocation does not affect citizenship status. Persons wanted on felony charges, such as Mr. Snowden, should not be allowed to proceed in any further international travel, other than is necessary to return him to the United States. Because of the Privacy Act, we cannot comment on Mr. Snowden's passport specifically."

He just keeps making himself look guiltier than ever of committing a crime, at this point only an idiot or an anarchist would support this criminal. and looks who's also helping him, communists and socialists, if you needed any more proof of his guilt. Had he done it the correct way and used the legal protections given to real whistleblowers here in the US he might not have to run and act like a criminal

If he is guilty of a crime, then the US government is equally guilty. Also, don't use the True Scotsman fallacy. A whistleblower is a whistleblower, regardless of whether you agree with what he did or not.

Also, I never knew being a communist or socialist made you immediately culpable to crimes

If he praises the freedom of countries like China, Russia and Venezuela while at the same time criticizing the freedoms of the US, he has all the necessary hypocrisy to fit in with the Wikileaks crowd.

If he praises the freedom of countries like China, Russia and Venezuela while at the same time criticizing the freedoms of the US, he has all the necessary hypocrisy to fit in with the Wikileaks crowd.

I dunno, if I did something like he did, I'd go to places which would make it difficult for the government I whisteblowed whatever on to extradite me. If it happens to be places which aren't 'friendly' to said government, then it kinda works in hand.

You know, the whole 'the enemy of your enemy is your friend" concept. Nothing new, and if you read up on history, has also been used by the US before. Not obscure history either. But just because he's running to such places doesn't mean he was working with them in the first place.

He's caught between a rock and hard place. Whether you agree with his actions or not, you have to admit that given the same set of circumstances, how many other people would probably do the exact same thing to avoid serious jail time.

Well, what's the 'whistleblower' or spy fighting for if he is looking for aid from less democratic and free countries? That would be kind of hypocrite . That makes him look like he just wanted to troll the US government and is associating himself with US adversaries and enemies

True, it could be seen as being hypocritical of him to associate himself with such places. But at the same time, he doesn't exactly have much choice when it comes to countries that don't extradite to the US, if his goal is to keep out of the US government's claws. Plus, it isn't clear whether he actually plans on staying in Russia. After all, there are places that have offered to help him out. Getting to those places is the tricky part, and even then, nothing is guaranteed.

The problem he is likely to have, if he goes to Venezuela or Ecuador, is that while their current governments are disposed to thwart the US's will on issues such as this, future regimes in those countries may be much more friendly to US interests, or just regard him as a nuisance that they'd rather not be involved with. I guess the solution would be to periodically move, and it's likely that there will be at least one government at any point in time that would be happy to have him, although whether he'd necessarily enjoy living in those regimes is another matter.

It's pretty interesting to see that there are people who genuinely believe that the United States of America refers to the federal government as though they are meant to reign supreme. The entire point of the founding of this country was that the people are the country, and the federal government is merely meant to serve those people.

It's a strange, backwards state of affairs when a man has the courage to dedicate himself to revealing the abuses of the government to the people and is considered a traitor. I'm not even sure how to reconcile that mindset with what America is supposed to be.

Snowden is a patriot, not a traitor. His leaks are trying to show the government's abuse of the Constitution. Do we need the NSA's data mining programs? Of course we do. Their response that the programs are responsible for finding terrorist attacks against us is probably true, The point is that the secrecy has snowballed beyond all possible rationalizations. This country was founded upon the concept of freedom, and the Constitution and Bill of Rights were authored to protect those freedoms. People, when they assume power, naturally gravitate to more power and to devices and methods that make that power easier to wield. That is what is, and will be, the cause of the destruction of the American dream of freedom, and that is what Snowden's purpose was in leaking these documents: to reassert the control of those shining articles that frame our freedom from those who would trample them.

It's pretty interesting to see that there are people who genuinely believe that the United States of America refers to the federal government as though they are meant to reign supreme. The entire point of the founding of this country was that the people are the country, and the federal government is merely meant to serve those people.

It's a strange, backwards state of affairs when a man has the courage to dedicate himself to revealing the abuses of the government to the people and is considered a traitor. I'm not even sure how to reconcile that mindset with what America is supposed to be.

I'd say about a third of the US population is willing to condemn a man to life in prison or worse so they can feel unmolested by reasonable, independent thought or ruminations on the fundamental nature of freedom. They'd rather have that delegated to the State because it's just too hard or something.

Hopefully the other two-thirds are firmly in the "an unexamined life is not worth living" camp.

Well, what's the 'whistleblower' or spy fighting for if he is looking for aid from less democratic and free countries? That would be kind of hypocrite . That makes him look like he just wanted to troll the US government and is associating himself with US adversaries and enemies

True, it could be seen as being hypocritical of him to associate himself with such places. But at the same time, he doesn't exactly have much choice when it comes to countries that don't extradite to the US, if his goal is to keep out of the US government's claws. Plus, it isn't clear whether he actually plans on staying in Russia. After all, there are places that have offered to help him out. Getting to those places is the tricky part, and even then, nothing is guaranteed.

Beggars can't be choosers, as the saying goes.

You can argue if this guy is a whistleblower,hero, spy, traitor or whatever. But there's no doubt in my mind that this guy committed an act of stupidity . He didn't use protection channels for whistleblowers neither he seems to have any kind of preparation for legal matters. He is not willing to face a court to defend himself or accept the responsibility of his acts . People that fought for their civil rights in the US had to face mod justice and prison , eventually those actions changed the social and constitutional landscape for people. For instance Ms Rosa Parks:

I really doubt that Snowden is going to denounce the abuses carried on in those countries while in fact he is collaborating with them

Snowden is being used by those countries as a political weapon against the US, i don't think they want him to bring more transparency and freedom to their governments. People should be more serious about this and grow up a little more.

First, one post about Iran is hardly an obsession. Second, if you read the quoted text as well as what's posted above the image, you may be able to piece together the logic of the example I was making.

Then again, you may not. If that's the case then I'm not sure I can help you much anyway.

I hope he makes it to Iceland. There, he won't have to be the pawn of some even-shittier government just to stay away from US torturers.

EDIT: I'm not using the word "torturer" because I think they'll put the thumbscrews on him. I'm referring partly to the treatment of Bradley Manning (who has endured punishment clearly defined as torture, by international treaties), partly to horrible conditions found in most civilian jails in the US, the punishment-factor of which goes far beyond the nominal purpose of excluding prisoners from society. At any rate, I doubt he'd be treated fairly prior to, during and after his trial, which probably wouldn't be transparent and open, either.

He has to run, literally, to the nearest safe haven-because he has more information than the government would like to have available.

If he ever comes back to the US, you will never hear from him again. It's that simple. He'll be convicted in no time flat, and put into a SuperMax prison for the rest of his life. No parole, no early release. By their lights, he's the ultimate traitor, and they will make sure that he gets the maximum punishment available, using every single trick in the book.

You think Manning has it bad? At least he gets a military tribunal. Snowden will be lucky to get an open trial. The government is perfectly capable of declaring anything about this case to be of "National Security Interest", and thus remove it from a public court. They've done it with other cases-what makes anyone think they're not above doing this now?

Believe me, this guy is #1 enemy of the state right now to the US Government, and they are frantically trying to get him under wraps.

Also, I wonder about the tech he uses to store his documents. They're certainly in digital format, and almost certainly encrypted to guard against theft by the agents of the governments helping him.

I wouldn't put it beneath the US to try to wipe his storage devices at-a-distance using strong magnetic fields or radiation or whatever, from devices they manage to get physically close to him (next hotel room over, etc). At least the Russians are likely to be wise to the appropriate counter-intelligence methods.

EDIT: Is this even possible? I'd appreciate a knowledgeable opinion, since I'm only speculating.

Do we need the NSA's data mining programs? Of course we do. Their response that the programs are responsible for finding terrorist attacks against us is probably true

I disagree with you on both of these points. If the best they can come up with is that over the course of ten years and 100 billion dollars spent they have potentially helped prevent as many as fifty terrorist plots world wide, that's a pretty lousy number. And how many of those could have been prevented through constitutionally valid means? They don't know, but would like you to assume the answer is zero. And why do we believe that number any way? They won't release documents to prove it, so we have to take the word of the same people who for the last ten years have been adamant that this spying wasn't taking place at all.

Guy is trying to escape the US.Does he go to:a) A country friendly to the US where they will probably extradite him to the US?b) A country not friendly to the US where they probably will NOT extradite him to the US?c) To the US because the US has shown itself to be honest open and transparent, and everyone has confidence in the US justice system.

Of course he has gone to "enemies" of the US.His only other current option appears to be Iceland, which has indicated they would probably give him asylum.Also, he has left HK because they would extradite him if the US managed to send a proper extradition request. Also HK isn't entirely China in every way.He isn't staying in Russia because he doesn't have a visa, he's there for one day.

So of the two places he's been so far, one might have extradited him, and the other he isn't expected to stay in and is there for a day, staying at the embassy of his eventual destination.

He didn't go to mainland China, he isn't staying in Russia. So far he hasn't gone to the US enemies to stay or seek refuge, he's gone there because he has the greatest chance of leaving again.When you are effectively able to bully most nations into doing what you ask, someone on the run is going to go to countries that won't bow down to any bullying. Those places would, kind of obviously, be the US' enemies.

Only idiots would use this as evidence or anything suggestive regarding his collaboration with "enemies" of the US. As someone already said, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Snowden is the latest in a long line of sacrificial lambs to the corruption of the US .gov (I'm American, thanks). The Constitution is not a velvet glove for the government; it should be a oak baseball bat for the American people. It's too bad the Starbucks/Kardashian/iWhatever generations have allowed our .gov to walk all over our civil liberties and rights. This whole thing just pisses me off more with every passing day...

If he praises the freedom of countries like China, Russia and Venezuela while at the same time criticizing the freedoms of the US, he has all the necessary hypocrisy to fit in with the Wikileaks crowd.

That's a big if. Has he praised anyone?

It's not like you can pick and choose which countries won't extradite you back to the US. It's not a wild coincidence that the ones we've had conflicts with are the ones who are willing to give asylum. If I had to make the choice between life in prison, torture, death or living in one of those countries I would choose the latter. And at the end of the day the will to survive out weighs all else.